<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mobile Commerce &#8211; Not your mama&#8217;s monitization</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.MobileStrategyPartners.com/2009/09/23/mobile-not-your-mamas-monitization/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.MobileStrategyPartners.com/2009/09/23/mobile-not-your-mamas-monitization/</link>
	<description>Strategic insight into mobile commerce</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Sep 2011 21:36:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Eads</title>
		<link>http://blog.MobileStrategyPartners.com/2009/09/23/mobile-not-your-mamas-monitization/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>David Eads</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:11:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.MobileStrategyPartners.com/?p=266#comment-12</guid>
		<description>Steve Smith at MediaPost.com clarifies in his blog that the Chitika data measured the same web-formated content. There were 92M impressions, 1.3M were from mobile devices. The sites were not optimized for mobile. So the CTR is measuring a smartphone user looking at an non-mobile optimized web ad. No wonder the CTR was much lower on phones than on the web. Duh.

This does, of course, add evidence that sites should optimize for mobile. It&#039;s amazing how many times I&#039;m asked why do anything unique for mobile users at all by site owners. Technically it&#039;s possible, but it&#039;s not as convenient as a mobile optimized site or a mobile app. (Which is why I&#039;m still scratching my head about the smartphone as a &quot;primary browser.&quot;).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve Smith at MediaPost.com clarifies in his blog that the Chitika data measured the same web-formated content. There were 92M impressions, 1.3M were from mobile devices. The sites were not optimized for mobile. So the CTR is measuring a smartphone user looking at an non-mobile optimized web ad. No wonder the CTR was much lower on phones than on the web. Duh.</p>
<p>This does, of course, add evidence that sites should optimize for mobile. It&#8217;s amazing how many times I&#8217;m asked why do anything unique for mobile users at all by site owners. Technically it&#8217;s possible, but it&#8217;s not as convenient as a mobile optimized site or a mobile app. (Which is why I&#8217;m still scratching my head about the smartphone as a &#8220;primary browser.&#8221;).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

